Then they would never have a range of products to draw in a breath of customers. To survive as a company Apple needs to provide real choice from which all of the possible customers can choose from.
What I am simply saying is allow the best for the money. For example, I thought putting a 650M with just 1 GB of video memory into the 15" rMBP wasn't good enough. I thought they should have went for 2 GB.
If they can put a faster quad-core processor into a computer even by a few hundred megahertz, put it in over a slower one.
Some wold argue that what is best for the money would be something other than Apple hardware. Others would say some of that money goes to better build quality in Apples hardware. In the end it really comes down to are you willing to pay Apples margins.
My personal opinion is that Apple has the advantage of quality in both hardware and software with respect to Windows and thus people see enough value to pay Apple high prices. We will only get quad cores in Apple products like the low end Mini and AIR when it is profitable for Apple. Of course the technology has to be there too, AIRs won't get quad cores until after the GPU issues is solved.
What I am simply saying is allow the best for the money. For example, I thought putting a 650M with just 1 GB of video memory into the 15" rMBP wasn't good enough. I thought they should have went for 2 GB.
If they can put a faster quad-core processor into a computer even by a few hundred megahertz, put it in over a slower one.
I really doubt those numbers. For one thing you would walk into the local Apple store and have a hard time even finding the 17" MBP. That is a sign right there of limited demand.
As to defending Apple that isn't my intention, the fact is you cant satisfy all the people all the time. To believe otherwise is just foolish.
As to a monster notebook that might be possible. It should be noted that Apple hasn't really commented much on the 17" MBP going missing, that could mean they are working on something new to replace the old model. That would still be a surprise though as I just don't believe the demand was as strong as you have indicated. I've seen a bit of a trend away form really large notebook PC's at work as people simply don't want to lug around all that mass.
Did you read my posts? This is about audio video pros who need a larger screen and ALL the power possible. 17" MBPs are incredibly convenient for this group. I don't even notice carrying mine, but yes if one is so feeble that a few pounds sends one to one's knees, I sympathize. Again the closest estimates for the last full year of sales for the 17" are between 200-300 thousand units. This was about 2% of the total.
It was reported as an estimate in 2011 by one of the main Apple analysts, that around 300,000 were sold that year. I find the the mentality of those who defend companies who don't satisfy customers bizarre, to say the least. I would not be a total surprise that at some point Apple will release a monster notebook because the pent up demand will warrant it.
Apple was selling around 4 million Macs per quarter at that point so 300k out of ~12 million is a small amount. The 13" and 15" MBP make up about 40-50%.
When it comes to options, you might find a small group that wants an 18" laptop like the Alienware, which has an option for dual 680M GPUs. You might find a group that only likes pink laptops. Every option comes with an audience of some kind but Apple has to weigh up whether it's worth the manufacturing resources to accommodate it. If one particular option only has < 3% market volume then it's probably not worth them bothering.
Apple was selling around 4 million Macs per quarter at that point so 300k out of ~12 million is a small amount. The 13" and 15" MBP make up about 40-50%.
When it comes to options, you might find a small group that wants an 18" laptop like the Alienware, which has an option for dual 680M GPUs. You might find a group that only likes pink laptops. Every option comes with an audience of some kind but Apple has to weigh up whether it's worth the manufacturing resources to accommodate it. If one particular option only has < 3% market volume then it's probably not worth them bothering.
A 17" screen isn't a large screen though and the 17" was never significantly more powerful than the 15":
What business is it of yours if a few hundred thousand power users are not happy with current offerings? This is competitive free market place. Its not mainstream but it is still worth significant revenue. Bean counter mentality is not what Apple used to be about. Analysts are already criticizing Apple for falling behind competitors that didn't exist until recently. This market segment of professional users will eventually find alternatives if Apple does not respond, and history has shown this is never good for the company. If you're happy with what's offered good for you. Many of my colleagues are not.
What business is it of yours if a few hundred thousand power users are not happy with current offerings? This is competitive free market place. Its not mainstream but it is still worth significant revenue. Bean counter mentality is not what Apple used to be about. Analysts are already criticizing Apple for falling behind competitors that didn't exist until recently. This market segment of professional users will eventually find alternatives if Apple does not respond, and history has shown this is never good for the company. If you're happy with what's offered good for you. Many of my colleagues are not.
You should remember that these were estimates from an outside source. Combine this with the fact that 2011 was a big improvement for both 15" and 17" models as both of them migrated to quad cpus. Out of those numbers (still unconfirmed) some amount would be replacing those models with rMBPs. You probably want a 17" version of that, but I suspect Apple doesn't implement too much custom work unless something sells in large (relative to Apple) numbers. The screen is still not as good as what I could purchase in a higher end desktop display 5 years ago, so either way, I'm personally anchored due to that.
Its not mainstream but it is still worth significant revenue.
300,000 per year = 75000 per quarter x say $2500 = $188m x 0.25 net margin = $47m net income per quarter. Apple made $13b last quarter. The potential income is not significant.
Bean counter mentality is not what Apple used to be about.
Yeah that comes up a lot but like I say, you can use that statement to justify them making any product. They have to base their supply choices on demand. That's how supply and demand works - when there's demand, they supply; when there's no demand, they no supply.
I'm not suggesting people have no reason to want a 17" laptop, I'm just pointing out that Apple has no reason to make one. It doesn't matter if the most important person in the world wants a 17" laptop, they previously offered one, people didn't buy it and so they replaced it with a design that people are buying.
I think the biggest problem they had before was that they priced it at $300 more than the 15" for the same spec. $300 is too much to pay for a slightly larger display. I've never liked that they tie spec to screen size. I prefer the idea of picking the size and then choosing the spec. It should for example be possible to get a dual-core i5 with integrated graphics with a 15" display - they'd just have low/mid/high performance in each size.
This market segment of professional users will eventually find alternatives if Apple does not respond
That's the only way they'll change though, is if large numbers of professional users start abandoning their products. Steve Jobs said that about the iPad - 'if we're wrong, people will stop buying them'. It doesn't always hold up but they already offered a 17" and the sales were obviously not good enough for them so they decided on a different route. If there's a price gap they want to maintain at the top, they can bring it back but if the price gap remains after they drop the prices of the rMBPs, it will be a clear indicator that it's not worth them doing.
Say that they don't ever do a 17" again, what will you do when it comes time to upgrade?
300,000 per year = 75000 per quarter x say $2500 = $188m x 0.25 net margin = $47m net income per quarter. Apple made $13b last quarter. The potential income is not significant.
Yeah that comes up a lot but like I say, you can use that statement to justify them making any product. They have to base their supply choices on demand. That's how supply and demand works - when there's demand, they supply; when there's no demand, they no supply.
I doubt their margins are that evenly distributed. At most companies the most expensive products within a given category would carry higher margins. I mean I wouldn't compare macbook pros to ipads, but within the macbook pro line, the margins are likely higher on a 17" than a 13".
Quote:
I'm not suggesting people have no reason to want a 17" laptop, I'm just pointing out that Apple has no reason to make one. It doesn't matter if the most important person in the world wants a 17" laptop, they previously offered one, people didn't buy it and so they replaced it with a design that people are buying.
I think the biggest problem they had before was that they priced it at $300 more than the 15" for the same spec. $300 is too much to pay for a slightly larger display. I've never liked that they tie spec to screen size. I prefer the idea of picking the size and then choosing the spec. It should for example be possible to get a dual-core i5 with integrated graphics with a 15" display - they'd just have low/mid/high performance in each size.
This is kind of the reverse of your imac argument. As you pointed out there Apple often forces you to buy one thing to access another. In terms of discrete graphics and quad core cpus, it's mainly an issue of price. The 15" rmbp is tiny to the point where I could add it to a backpack on day hikes without feeling burdened.
Find an alternative. I will NEVER buy a 15" laptop for audio work. I find your rabid defense of Apple peculiar, to say the least. BTW stock just went down to 400 from the 700s. Jobs understood halo products much better than current management. People love to go into a store and see some amazing top of the line item that most can only dream about, but others have to have.
A company like Apple ceding the high end notebook power user will have far reaching implications, IMHO, but it's still too early to say that definitively. We'll see whose right.
Not yet, but they are heading that way. I hope not of course. The 15 retina is cut down and light, great for students, not great for audio visual pros. The specs and size are well below whats available from other vendors. If this disparity gets too great there will be consequences.
BTW stock just went down to 400 from the 700s. Jobs understood halo products much better than current management.
The stock isn't down because of the 17" MBP and Mac Pro - they make up a tiny portion of their profits. It has also been pointed out it went down even more dramatically while they still sold the 17" MBP.
People love to go into a store and see some amazing top of the line item that most can only dream about, but others have to have.
So you think people used to go into a store and think 'oh gee, I only have $2199 in my pocket, if only I could be rich and famous, I'd be able to afford an extra $300 to get the 17" laptop I really want that's exactly the same speed'? Doubtful.
A company like Apple ceding the high end notebook power user will have far reaching implications, IMHO, but it's still too early to say that definitively. We'll see whose right.
Well, it'll probably be hard for them to make up that <0.5% of lost profits but I suppose the executive team could have a whip-round.
Your lack of understanding of marketing is colossal. What other specs do competitors have,LOL? 32 to 64 gb of ram, high end discrete GPUs, blu ray burners, Intel extreme processors. 17-18 inch screens. Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are. You clearly have no understanding of halo effect. All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision. Well bean counter, when a stock goes from 700 to 400 there are obviously issues.
Your lack of understanding of marketing is colossal. What other specs do competitors have,LOL? 32 to 64 gb of ram, high end discrete GPUs, blu ray burners, Intel extreme processors. 17-18 inch screens. Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are. You clearly have no understanding of halo effect. All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision. Well bean counter, when a stock goes from 700 to 400 there are obviously issues.
Jobs didn't really treat the 17" notebooks as halo products, and very few 18" ones have really existed. The markets for things like desknotes were always pretty limited. In 2009 you could buy a notebook with an i7 920 stuffed in for several thousand dollars. Most of those extreme configurations were a way to provide mobility to those who would really be better served by a desktop. The Dell precision mobile workstations were heavily aimed at engineers. HP had a similar product at one point. Lenovo has some heavy lifting hardware with the thinkpad line, but anything with mobile cpus caps out at 32GB max in an 8x4 configuration. There are no notebooks that take 64 GB of ram with the possible exception of desknotes with 16GB dimms. I doubt you know of anyone that owns such a thing, and really they hold no cachet factor. Their appeal is that they can be taken as carry on luggage. If you're talking about creative professionals that really need screen real estate, it's more about what they need while away from their desks. As of today, you still can't find anything in a notebook that matches the quality available in some of the higher end and desktop displays. That could easily change, but even then a 24" - 27" display set to eye level is so much nicer than a 17" notebook display. I've used both. I understand perfectly why you would prefer the 17", but the attempts at leveraged reasoning make little sense.
Apple wasn't going to stay in the 700s forever. What comes up must come down and those saying that stock price could have reached $1,000 share are the same fools that were claiming gold could go $3,000 or more an ounce.
I personally didn't mind the 17" and though it seemed big, I wouldn't mind to have owned one except having the same tech specs as the 15" without at least more options was not good.
Haswell is going to prove to be very interesting when it comes out and frankly I am sick of talking about it. I just want it along with the new Apple products to be out already.
Your lack of understanding of marketing is colossal. What other specs do competitors have,LOL? 32 to 64 gb of ram, high end discrete GPUs, blu ray burners, Intel extreme processors.
Yep machines that are either very bulky or throttle excessively. What you seem to miss is just how well Apples machines bench mark or actually perform in real world situations.
17-18 inch screens. Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are.
Which is precisely why they have pushed things like retina so hard. Retina may be a little before its time but it puts real distinctive capability in the users hand.
You clearly have no understanding of halo effect.
If you where to talk about the halo effect we might have a discussion but you seem to suffer from penis envy.
All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision. Well bean counter, when a stock goes from 700 to 400 there are obviously issues.
If Apple comes out in tHe following weeks with excellent earnings reports, new products and other services and the stock still lags who will you blame then? You seem to equate stock price with performance and frankly that is only true in an idealized market. The reality it there are many influences on stock price some of them very negative and out of Apples control.
Apple wasn't going to stay in the 700s forever. What comes up must come down and those saying that stock price could have reached $1,000 share are the same fools that were claiming gold could go $3,000 or more an ounce.
What people haven't grasped here is that Apple grew in value way to fast considering the fundamentals. Apple will eventually recover some of that price but hopefully it will be the result of rational investment. A huge correction was obvious looking in from the outside simply due to the irrational feeding frenzy.
I personally didn't mind the 17" and though it seemed big, I wouldn't mind to have owned one except having the same tech specs as the 15" without at least more options was not good.
Apple has been doing a terrible job configuring machines and creating models that support an array of needs. I'm not happy about the Minis as it is an absurd example of paying more money for effectively less value. The 17" MBP I've never entertained buying so frankly I've never looked at seriously. That being said they do need a broader array of hardware in the laptop line up. I just don't see a big demand for 17" machines though.
Haswell is going to prove to be very interesting when it comes out and frankly I am sick of talking about it. I just want it along with the new Apple products to be out already.
I'm with you there 100%. Especially now that my MBP has just started creating audio problems for me.
All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision.
The hardware that you describe has never been made by Apple, only by soulless, visionless companies like Dell, HP and Lenovo. This is more the kind of thing you're after:
It has an i7-3940XM, up to 32GB RAM, dual 2GB 680M GPUs and a high price tag of $4600. Nearly 3 hours of battery life. There is a Blu-Ray option in there too somewhere. They've also thought of AV professionals by bundling a TN panel.
Of course, I can only dream of owning such an awesome piece of hardware. Hang on, I think I'm experiencing the halo effect.
Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are.
Just like the current staff at Apple. This same thing happens every time Apple discontinues something they like and all of a sudden they're abandoning all the important people and have turned into bean counters. What happens when you don't count beans is what happens to companies like Avid:
As you can see, it's exactly the opposite of what you describe. That company almost exclusively targets the audience you claim to be the most important audience - the AV professionals - and they are running net losses, laying off hundreds of employees every year and selling assets with very little positive outlook.
A company like Apple ceding the high end notebook power user will have far reaching implications, IMHO, but it's still too early to say that definitively. We'll see whose right.
No time like the present. Buy an 18" Alienware and put all your life savings into Avid stock. Not only will you be infinitely more productive and creative 'on the road', that people will pay you hundreds of thousands of dollars for your work but you'll also become a multi-millionaire because of the performance of the stock.
They could do a better job yes and if not this year then hopefully next year there will be a quad-core in the base model.
There's a report saying the dual-core 35W Haswells won't be out until Q4 so unless they drop the entry Mini, they'll have to hold it back until later. It's looking like the first updates will go to the MBP and Air. The desktop updates most likely September, possibly later.
There's a report saying the dual-core 35W Haswells won't be out until Q4 so unless they drop the entry Mini, they'll have to hold it back until later. It's looking like the first updates will go to the MBP and Air. The desktop updates most likely September, possibly later.
That sounds accurate, though I want it out now. So ecstatic! : (
Comments
What I am simply saying is allow the best for the money. For example, I thought putting a 650M with just 1 GB of video memory into the 15" rMBP wasn't good enough. I thought they should have went for 2 GB.
If they can put a faster quad-core processor into a computer even by a few hundred megahertz, put it in over a slower one.
My personal opinion is that Apple has the advantage of quality in both hardware and software with respect to Windows and thus people see enough value to pay Apple high prices. We will only get quad cores in Apple products like the low end Mini and AIR when it is profitable for Apple. Of course the technology has to be there too, AIRs won't get quad cores until after the GPU issues is solved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I really doubt those numbers. For one thing you would walk into the local Apple store and have a hard time even finding the 17" MBP. That is a sign right there of limited demand.
As to defending Apple that isn't my intention, the fact is you cant satisfy all the people all the time. To believe otherwise is just foolish.
As to a monster notebook that might be possible. It should be noted that Apple hasn't really commented much on the 17" MBP going missing, that could mean they are working on something new to replace the old model. That would still be a surprise though as I just don't believe the demand was as strong as you have indicated. I've seen a bit of a trend away form really large notebook PC's at work as people simply don't want to lug around all that mass.
Did you read my posts? This is about audio video pros who need a larger screen and ALL the power possible. 17" MBPs are incredibly convenient for this group. I don't even notice carrying mine, but yes if one is so feeble that a few pounds sends one to one's knees, I sympathize. Again the closest estimates for the last full year of sales for the 17" are between 200-300 thousand units. This was about 2% of the total.
Apple was selling around 4 million Macs per quarter at that point so 300k out of ~12 million is a small amount. The 13" and 15" MBP make up about 40-50%.
When it comes to options, you might find a small group that wants an 18" laptop like the Alienware, which has an option for dual 680M GPUs. You might find a group that only likes pink laptops. Every option comes with an audience of some kind but Apple has to weigh up whether it's worth the manufacturing resources to accommodate it. If one particular option only has < 3% market volume then it's probably not worth them bothering.
A 17" screen isn't a large screen though and the 17" was never significantly more powerful than the 15":
http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2011/02/macbookpro-benchmarks-early-2011/
They had the same processors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Apple was selling around 4 million Macs per quarter at that point so 300k out of ~12 million is a small amount. The 13" and 15" MBP make up about 40-50%.
When it comes to options, you might find a small group that wants an 18" laptop like the Alienware, which has an option for dual 680M GPUs. You might find a group that only likes pink laptops. Every option comes with an audience of some kind but Apple has to weigh up whether it's worth the manufacturing resources to accommodate it. If one particular option only has < 3% market volume then it's probably not worth them bothering.
A 17" screen isn't a large screen though and the 17" was never significantly more powerful than the 15":
http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2011/02/macbookpro-benchmarks-early-2011/
They had the same processors.
What business is it of yours if a few hundred thousand power users are not happy with current offerings? This is competitive free market place. Its not mainstream but it is still worth significant revenue. Bean counter mentality is not what Apple used to be about. Analysts are already criticizing Apple for falling behind competitors that didn't exist until recently. This market segment of professional users will eventually find alternatives if Apple does not respond, and history has shown this is never good for the company. If you're happy with what's offered good for you. Many of my colleagues are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long
What business is it of yours if a few hundred thousand power users are not happy with current offerings? This is competitive free market place. Its not mainstream but it is still worth significant revenue. Bean counter mentality is not what Apple used to be about. Analysts are already criticizing Apple for falling behind competitors that didn't exist until recently. This market segment of professional users will eventually find alternatives if Apple does not respond, and history has shown this is never good for the company. If you're happy with what's offered good for you. Many of my colleagues are not.
You should remember that these were estimates from an outside source. Combine this with the fact that 2011 was a big improvement for both 15" and 17" models as both of them migrated to quad cpus. Out of those numbers (still unconfirmed) some amount would be replacing those models with rMBPs. You probably want a 17" version of that, but I suspect Apple doesn't implement too much custom work unless something sells in large (relative to Apple) numbers. The screen is still not as good as what I could purchase in a higher end desktop display 5 years ago, so either way, I'm personally anchored due to that.
300,000 per year = 75000 per quarter x say $2500 = $188m x 0.25 net margin = $47m net income per quarter. Apple made $13b last quarter. The potential income is not significant.
Yeah that comes up a lot but like I say, you can use that statement to justify them making any product. They have to base their supply choices on demand. That's how supply and demand works - when there's demand, they supply; when there's no demand, they no supply.
I'm not suggesting people have no reason to want a 17" laptop, I'm just pointing out that Apple has no reason to make one. It doesn't matter if the most important person in the world wants a 17" laptop, they previously offered one, people didn't buy it and so they replaced it with a design that people are buying.
I think the biggest problem they had before was that they priced it at $300 more than the 15" for the same spec. $300 is too much to pay for a slightly larger display. I've never liked that they tie spec to screen size. I prefer the idea of picking the size and then choosing the spec. It should for example be possible to get a dual-core i5 with integrated graphics with a 15" display - they'd just have low/mid/high performance in each size.
Analysts are not very reliable - Apple isn't falling behind anyone yet.
That's the only way they'll change though, is if large numbers of professional users start abandoning their products. Steve Jobs said that about the iPad - 'if we're wrong, people will stop buying them'. It doesn't always hold up but they already offered a 17" and the sales were obviously not good enough for them so they decided on a different route. If there's a price gap they want to maintain at the top, they can bring it back but if the price gap remains after they drop the prices of the rMBPs, it will be a clear indicator that it's not worth them doing.
Say that they don't ever do a 17" again, what will you do when it comes time to upgrade?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
300,000 per year = 75000 per quarter x say $2500 = $188m x 0.25 net margin = $47m net income per quarter. Apple made $13b last quarter. The potential income is not significant.
Yeah that comes up a lot but like I say, you can use that statement to justify them making any product. They have to base their supply choices on demand. That's how supply and demand works - when there's demand, they supply; when there's no demand, they no supply.
I doubt their margins are that evenly distributed. At most companies the most expensive products within a given category would carry higher margins. I mean I wouldn't compare macbook pros to ipads, but within the macbook pro line, the margins are likely higher on a 17" than a 13".
Quote:
I'm not suggesting people have no reason to want a 17" laptop, I'm just pointing out that Apple has no reason to make one. It doesn't matter if the most important person in the world wants a 17" laptop, they previously offered one, people didn't buy it and so they replaced it with a design that people are buying.
I think the biggest problem they had before was that they priced it at $300 more than the 15" for the same spec. $300 is too much to pay for a slightly larger display. I've never liked that they tie spec to screen size. I prefer the idea of picking the size and then choosing the spec. It should for example be possible to get a dual-core i5 with integrated graphics with a 15" display - they'd just have low/mid/high performance in each size.
This is kind of the reverse of your imac argument. As you pointed out there Apple often forces you to buy one thing to access another. In terms of discrete graphics and quad core cpus, it's mainly an issue of price. The 15" rmbp is tiny to the point where I could add it to a backpack on day hikes without feeling burdened.
Find an alternative. I will NEVER buy a 15" laptop for audio work. I find your rabid defense of Apple peculiar, to say the least. BTW stock just went down to 400 from the 700s. Jobs understood halo products much better than current management. People love to go into a store and see some amazing top of the line item that most can only dream about, but others have to have.
A company like Apple ceding the high end notebook power user will have far reaching implications, IMHO, but it's still too early to say that definitively. We'll see whose right.
Originally Posted by Trajan Long
A company like Apple ceding the high end notebook power user…
Good thing they haven't.
Not yet, but they are heading that way. I hope not of course. The 15 retina is cut down and light, great for students, not great for audio visual pros. The specs and size are well below whats available from other vendors. If this disparity gets too great there will be consequences.
Don't you mean you will never use a 15" display for audio work? You can connect a larger display to a laptop if you want.
The stock isn't down because of the 17" MBP and Mac Pro - they make up a tiny portion of their profits. It has also been pointed out it went down even more dramatically while they still sold the 17" MBP.
So you think people used to go into a store and think 'oh gee, I only have $2199 in my pocket, if only I could be rich and famous, I'd be able to afford an extra $300 to get the 17" laptop I really want that's exactly the same speed'? Doubtful.
Well, it'll probably be hard for them to make up that <0.5% of lost profits but I suppose the executive team could have a whip-round.
The spec would be the same if they made a 17" version and what other vendors are well above what they have?
Your lack of understanding of marketing is colossal. What other specs do competitors have,LOL? 32 to 64 gb of ram, high end discrete GPUs, blu ray burners, Intel extreme processors. 17-18 inch screens. Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are. You clearly have no understanding of halo effect. All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision. Well bean counter, when a stock goes from 700 to 400 there are obviously issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long
Your lack of understanding of marketing is colossal. What other specs do competitors have,LOL? 32 to 64 gb of ram, high end discrete GPUs, blu ray burners, Intel extreme processors. 17-18 inch screens. Jobs loved the creative professional and knew how important they are. You clearly have no understanding of halo effect. All your points are bean counter points, lacking soul or vision. Well bean counter, when a stock goes from 700 to 400 there are obviously issues.
Jobs didn't really treat the 17" notebooks as halo products, and very few 18" ones have really existed. The markets for things like desknotes were always pretty limited. In 2009 you could buy a notebook with an i7 920 stuffed in for several thousand dollars. Most of those extreme configurations were a way to provide mobility to those who would really be better served by a desktop. The Dell precision mobile workstations were heavily aimed at engineers. HP had a similar product at one point. Lenovo has some heavy lifting hardware with the thinkpad line, but anything with mobile cpus caps out at 32GB max in an 8x4 configuration. There are no notebooks that take 64 GB of ram with the possible exception of desknotes with 16GB dimms. I doubt you know of anyone that owns such a thing, and really they hold no cachet factor. Their appeal is that they can be taken as carry on luggage. If you're talking about creative professionals that really need screen real estate, it's more about what they need while away from their desks. As of today, you still can't find anything in a notebook that matches the quality available in some of the higher end and desktop displays. That could easily change, but even then a 24" - 27" display set to eye level is so much nicer than a 17" notebook display. I've used both. I understand perfectly why you would prefer the 17", but the attempts at leveraged reasoning make little sense.
I personally didn't mind the 17" and though it seemed big, I wouldn't mind to have owned one except having the same tech specs as the 15" without at least more options was not good.
Haswell is going to prove to be very interesting when it comes out and frankly I am sick of talking about it. I just want it along with the new Apple products to be out already.
Yep machines that are either very bulky or throttle excessively. What you seem to miss is just how well Apples machines bench mark or actually perform in real world situations. Which is precisely why they have pushed things like retina so hard. Retina may be a little before its time but it puts real distinctive capability in the users hand. If you where to talk about the halo effect we might have a discussion but you seem to suffer from penis envy. If Apple comes out in tHe following weeks with excellent earnings reports, new products and other services and the stock still lags who will you blame then? You seem to equate stock price with performance and frankly that is only true in an idealized market. The reality it there are many influences on stock price some of them very negative and out of Apples control.
I'm with you there 100%. Especially now that my MBP has just started creating audio problems for me.
They could do a better job yes and if not this year then hopefully next year there will be a quad-core in the base model.
The hardware that you describe has never been made by Apple, only by soulless, visionless companies like Dell, HP and Lenovo. This is more the kind of thing you're after:
http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-m18x-r2/pd.aspx?&~ck=mn
It has an i7-3940XM, up to 32GB RAM, dual 2GB 680M GPUs and a high price tag of $4600. Nearly 3 hours of battery life. There is a Blu-Ray option in there too somewhere. They've also thought of AV professionals by bundling a TN panel.
Of course, I can only dream of owning such an awesome piece of hardware. Hang on, I think I'm experiencing the halo effect.
Just like the current staff at Apple. This same thing happens every time Apple discontinues something they like and all of a sudden they're abandoning all the important people and have turned into bean counters. What happens when you don't count beans is what happens to companies like Avid:
http://www.google.com/finance?cid=656328
http://www.sonicscoop.com/2013/02/11/avid-switches-ceos-will-louis-hernandez-turn-it-around/
As you can see, it's exactly the opposite of what you describe. That company almost exclusively targets the audience you claim to be the most important audience - the AV professionals - and they are running net losses, laying off hundreds of employees every year and selling assets with very little positive outlook.
No time like the present. Buy an 18" Alienware and put all your life savings into Avid stock. Not only will you be infinitely more productive and creative 'on the road', that people will pay you hundreds of thousands of dollars for your work but you'll also become a multi-millionaire because of the performance of the stock.
There's a report saying the dual-core 35W Haswells won't be out until Q4 so unless they drop the entry Mini, they'll have to hold it back until later. It's looking like the first updates will go to the MBP and Air. The desktop updates most likely September, possibly later.
That sounds accurate, though I want it out now. So ecstatic! : (